Human Population Growth

Introduction

A controversial topic that can result in heated exchanges between those who feel the world is overpopulated with human beings and those who feel it is
not. While it might seem like a clear-cut issue to some, in reality it is a complex issue with many factors to consider. This might be due to the
commonly misunderstood definition of "overpopulated" when used in this context. ("Overpopulated" does not simply mean "a lack of physical space
to accommodate the number of people in a given region".) Nevertheless, I will demonstrate my views and allow the reader to decide whether he or she
agrees that human population growth is a significant issue.

Drinkable Water

Perhaps the most essential resource for our continued survival. Sure, there is plenty of water on this planet but how much of it is drinkable? Even
through the use of modern technologies to purify water so that it may become drinkable, there is already a worldwide fresh water shortage. As the
global population increases, the water crisis only gets worse. Remember that there needs to be enough fresh water to sustain the daily requirements of
every single person.

Fresh Food

Another essential resource. It is true that there is plenty of wasted food around the world that could be used to feed those in need. Important to
remember is that everybody should have access to fresh, healthy food that will ensure their survival.

Space

For proponents of unlimited population growth, this seems to be the most popular argument. I'm sure you have heard the claim that "the global
population could easily fit inside Texas...therefore, overpopulation is a myth!". This is true in the theoretical sense, but how true is it in the
practical sense? Can you imagine 7 billion people living all amongst each other, squashed together like insects? It would not work. Also, it would
simply not work to have the global population in a centralised region (see other sections).

Habitable Land

The vast majority of people need some form of shelter/accommodation to survive the elements and make a living. How does one go about ensuring that
every person has - at the least - a modestly-sized apartment to live in and claim as their residence?

Distribution and Allocation of Resources

Probably the most overlooked consideration of unlimited population growth proponents. It's all well and good to have enough resources to sustain the
lives of 7 billion people (even though we don't), but how do we go about distributing those resources to every single person? Can you imagine passing
a meal bag to 7 billion people every day, 3 times a day?

Governance

While some people believe we do not need a formal Government to survive, most would agree that we need a non-corrupt and just Government to help
manage people and maintain a hierarchy of sorts. How do you govern 7 billion people all in one area?

Support Services

What about all the services many people take for granted? Such as the fire brigade, police force and paramedics. How could these services cater to 7
billion people in one given area? Services are already stretched thin in most parts of the world.

Conclusion

I believe that human population growth is a significant issue worthy of examination. I do NOT advocate depopulation measures, but feel education could
go a long way to curbing exploding population growth, as could worldwide government-funded contraceptives. If you have any suggestions, please feel
free to share it.

A big help would be the catholic church telling people they can use contraception.
In just over 100 years our population has risen from around 2 billion to 7 billion, and how many of those have a full belly and decent water to
drink?.
I know I will get flamed for this but a global ban on the amount of kids people have may be needed, it would only take a generation or so to sort out
and then our kids kids may have a better future.
OR is it we are just living to long? looking at the figures of the amount of old people just in the UK is scary

Between 2010 and 2030 the number of people aged over 65 will increase by 51%.
Half of those born after 2007 can expect to live to over 100.
We will not be able to keep us all maybe some type of logans run will be needed in the future....I will be one of those culled but If it meant that
future generations will have a better time I will accept 75 being my maximum age.

The topics you have highlighted are certainly some of the major issues concerning population growth and I am glad you listed "Drinkable Water"
as the first topic to be discussed because I feel this to be one of the most important.

Potable Water in my opinion is one of the most significant factors influencing how the world can deal with population growth. The reason for this is
two fold. First, Potable water impacts every other issue you have mentioned, including some you have not. Secondly, it is fundamental, or an
inelastic, requirement for our survival.

Water influences food production, the suitable locations for future/continued habitation, the allocation of other resources, governance and the
support systems you have described. Without water, how much food can we really produce, we have left dependence on natural rainfall to meet the
demands of industrial agriculture decades ago.

The availability of water will influence how practical a specific location is for settlement, no point building a brand new stack of apartments in the
middle of the desert without a reservoir of water.

Allocation of water would being the dependent variable in meeting the nutritional needs of the world as we can survive only for a short period of time
in comparison to being without food.

Governance is already playing an important rule in the management of water resources. India and Pakistan are already in rows over the dwindling
reserves on their continent for their exploding populations...

I am a firm believer that water will be one of the primary resources future wars are fought over to meet the demands of an exploding global
population.

Population control will either meet its equilibrium or be knocked back into it (Depending on which research you subscribe to with respect to healthy
populations levels) via natural or man made processes such as, but not limited to famine, drought and war..

I read a while back that the population is actually likely to decrease. I believe the theory was that as countries become wealthier, and harder
working, the birth rates will be lower. This has already been proven in some European countries I believe.

I haven't got time to read through this article yet but I think this will explain...

I don't believe the situation to be as dire as the mega wealthy elites would have you believe.

I'm a firm believer that advances in technology should keep the population in check for at least another thousand years. And by then we should have
been well on our way to terraforming another planet within our neighbourhood. I think that for the elite of is more a question of manageability, as
the current uneven distribution of wealth is the only thing that won't be sustainable much further into the future, just like the throw away style
economy. We don't farm nearly as much as we could either.

Just take a look at Australia for example, we have the lowest population density per capita on the world, most of which is perfectly habitable. We are
a long way off having to sterilise or poison the population just yet IMO.

Remember that the issue of clean water, food, hygiene, houses, medecines etc. has all to do with money and is all being controlled by the big
corporations and corrupt governements.
They don't give a crap for anyones health or wellfare. They only care about themselfs and their special higher secret cummunity. Those that are
'chosen'.
Know that with all the money and 'research' spended on making war, every human being would have had a long time ago acces to fresh food, clean
water, medecine. And i'm not talking about the money used for making un-necessary products to entertain the population, bad foods, all the money
being put into corrupt and manipulated media projects like movies, reality shows and the other 99.9% you see on television, un-necessary luxeries( i
have a bigger house than you so i'm better). Where would the world stand then?
This is all to keep you busy, to give you the illusion you have free choices. Well if you really have freedom stop cooperating in these types of
nonsense, stop buying crap you don't need, stop supporting the big corporations and automaticly the less wealthier will be helped. Or are we too much
brainwashed and not seeing reality anymore?

Has someone ever counted the free space there would be if all these corporations would vanish?
It would be like discovering a whole new planet.

It's not difficult to see this is all being done intentionally, to keep the poor poor.
Why is that? There are many theories about the reasons.

Could it be like George ones said ''

Or maybe there is a hidden agenda to depopulation? Let those poor people populate their areas, untill they start having more and more diseases and
without acces to clean water, food and medecine it will automatically end up in an epidemic where they elliminate themselfs?

While some people believe we do not need a formal Government to survive, most would agree that we need a non-corrupt and just Government to help
manage people and maintain a hierarchy of sorts. How do you govern 7 billion people all in one area?

Every form of governement was and will be corrupt in some way.
We don't need someone to say what to do just to survive. That is not what survival is about, that is control!

Support Services? What about all the services many people take for granted? Such as the fire brigade, police force and paramedics. How could these
services cater to 7 billion people in one given area? Services are already stretched thin in most parts of the world.

We seems to manage to send where ever needed millitary personel all over the world in a short amount of time?

There was just an interesting thread about population
on ATS. Basically everyone, all 7+ billion of us, standing
with elbow room in one place, would fit in the state of Rhode Island.
Which is our ittiest bittiest state here in the US.

If we all (7 billion again) were rolled into a ball we'd fit on the
Mall in DC.

It helped me realize, how little space we take up..
Ergo,we have a whole bunch of room
and plenty of resources, if used wisely.
That's the tricky part. www.abovetopsecret.com...

i recently returned from europe and was so amazed at the amount of people there are, everywhere hundreds upon thousands and although this has been on
my mind for some time now I’m yet to hear anything about the growth rate and control over it, to be honest I’m hearing quite the opposite.

It seems as though governments and leaders and science are doing all they can to either increase life, prolong life, keep us alive or prevent us from
dying i.e medicine, cures.
i will never forget my lecturer saying “medicine was the worst thing that ever happened to this earth”

He was not wrong, there is so much energy put in to keep us alive, prolonging our life? is this natural? it could be argued that it is part of our
evolution, i.e our brain evolves and we learn to create fire and now we learn to keep life prolonged ?? everything we see is a materialisation of an
idea therefore there is some natural connotations tied to it, however have we learned what this prolonging of life will mean in 50 years? i guess not,
are we waiting for it to fall out of the sky an hit us in the head?

Population control is probably not immediately needed but immediately should be on the drawing board. And I’m sure i don’t need to outline the
ramifications of an unchecked populating organism. if ever a naturally occurring situation occurs? because weeds are not weeds in their ‘Natural”
environment!!!!!!!!

now may i finish with an idea I’ve had for sometime now about "nature", i would like to see the comments that follow:

if we took the lion away the zebra would consume unchecked and eventually overpopulate and deplete its niche in a matter of years, if we were to take
the zebra away the lion would die off. what is our lion? do we even have one and if not how does that fit with nature? this cycle can be seen in all
ecosystems from earth to sea.

We would not have to worry about over population if we were part of a natural cycle, it may be that we put emotion to one side and simply allow what
needs to be done, for our future because we don’t own this land we have it on loan.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.